Vox45

14 hours ago, johninderby said:

Rotation is pretty well standard with all crayford focusers. The Baader also has 5 mounting posrions for accessories so more than one finder shoe can be used. 

thank you all for your answers. I've had my eye on the Baader Diamond Steeltrack for quite a while so there seems to be a consensus on this beeing the right choice for my 80ED

I was put off by the fact that there is no mounting shoe for my guide scope so I am a bit curious about what you said johninderby ? Do you mean that it is possible to install a shoe on the baader focuser ? No DIY hole drilling or anything like that needed ?

Thanks

Hello all,

I fiddled with the stock focuser that comes with the SW 80ED and followed a lot of tutorial on how to make it better, less slippage and so on, but I still have issues when using an electric focuser to bring the tube back in when there is load on the focuser (camera and FF/FR) 

In the meantime I've decided to construct my own little Arduino focuser (MyfocuserPro) so now I am thinking of changing the stock focuser for a better one ...

Should I go for a Crayford type focuser or a rack and pinion focuser ? I think that rack and pinion make more sens as I can set the backlash in the autofocuser software and that would eliminate the slippage issue (unless there is too much weight and then the motors would skip steps but that is another issue). It seems that most people use Crayford focuser,  why would a rack and pinion not be worthy of consideration ?

Any thoughts on this ?

Thank you for you advice  I will try that !

6 hours ago, wimvb said:

How and when in the process did you mix the short an long exposures? 

I have to admit that I just threw everything into the mix. Your comment gave me pause ... So I did the whole process once more but I only used the 300s light frames this time.

this is the result after integration of 12x 300s light frames:

no more vertical bands ! but I still get the dark corners on the upper and lower right side.

Compared to 12x 300s + 10x 10s + 10x 15s + 10x 20s giving this result :

So it seems that throwing all the files with different duration into the mix was not such a good idea  I was biased (no pun intended) by the fact that I just throw everything in DSS and get good results... 

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

If you use 10 s exposures with your Canon, I think your subs are underexposed. The lines/bands are a typical read pattern of a dslr sensor.

Flats should be as neutral as possible, but PI can handle a colour cast caused by the calibration process. Post processing will take care of this. It will be corrected during backgound neutralization. Personally I would try to avoid doing any processing on calibration frames, other than calibration and integration.

It took me a while to understand where you got the 10s exposures number from  I see that you got that number from the name of the file in the debayer window I posted. Actually, it was 300s subs and I took a couple of 10s and 15s to help with the core of M42. The rest are 300s subs.

On 17/12/2019 at 19:29, Aramcheck said:

I could be wrong (being very new to Pixinsight myself) but check whether you should be specifying "RGGB". If you open one of your Lights & go to the Process Console on the left hand side of the screen you should see what the CFA pattern is. CR2 files from my Canon are "GBRG" & if I debayer with a diferent setting, like "RGGB" I get a very different colour background.

Worth checking your Master Bias & Darks too I think, as the top image looks like it has more noise than the single frame. (Open the master bias/dark and compare with a single bias/dark frame - the master should have less noise & a smoother appearance).

Cheers
Ivor

Yes I did check to see if if my Canon produced "RGGB" patterns. It is the case.

9 hours ago, wimvb said:

Your master flat is not neutral, which means that it introduces the opposite colour to your light frames. Eg, if the flat frame has RGB values 0.25, 0.5, 0.5 (scale 0 .. 1), the calibration routine will divide:

(Light_R - Dark_R)/0.25

(Light_G - Dark_G)/0.5

(Light_B - Dark_B)/0.5

This will give a higher Red signal in the calibrated light frame than Green and Blue.

Things to consider

• Try to create neutral flats. I believe that EL panels can result in non neutral flats
• Make sure you do the calibration before deBayering (ie, calibraton frames should not be deBayered, only lights just before star alignment)
• Create proper darks for flat calibration

So I've applied this method from Cloudy night I posted earlier in this thread :

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/667524-preparing-color-balanced-osc-flats-in-pixinsight/

It is possible to prepare a balanced CFA master flat in the same way with PixInsight.  Here is the procedure I use:

Prepare the master flat as usual.
Use the SplitCFA process to create images containing the four separated CFA channels.
Use the LinearFit process to equalize the four images.  Use the channel with lowest intensity as the reference, and apply LinearFit to the other three images.  For me, the CFA0 (red) channel has the lowest intensity in twilight sky flats.
Use the MergeCFA process to recombine the four images, and save the resulting CFA image as a file.  I name the resulting image file "grey-master-flat".  Use this color-balanced master flat (without debayering) to calibrate the light subs.

I ended up with a flat file like this:

A single frame calibrated with the master flat/bias/dark now looks like this (debayered/strech for the purpose of showing the result, I do not do this before registering and stacking)

once star aligned I get this (!!!)

and after stacking I get this final image:

All those vertical bands ! and the dark corners on the upper and lower right side.

I am doing some tests right now, with different combinations of duration/light intensity and with/without the CLS-CCD filter and I am getting results all over the place. I am obviously doing something wrong, I will need to dig a little deeper and read again the "Inside pixinsight" book

Very nice picture indeed, I did not know this galaxy, amazing details !

What software did you use to frame your picture and write your signature and info on the target ? It looks quite nice and adds a nice touch when sharing with others  

So I had my first go at M42, it was quite difficult to process. I used DSS for the 1st picture and Pixinsight for the the second one. I prefer the second one but I find it a lot more noisy and blueish .. After a couple of hours playing around I tend to lose track of what is good or overprocessed.. I need your fresh eyes people  

Please, any constructive criticism is welcome as I have not a lot of experience processing deep sky images

Processed with DSS

Procesed with Pixinsight

Thanks!

no I am running the debayer process like this

I debayerd my master flat to see what it looked like ... 

My "problem" might be related to this thread I found on Cloudy nights 

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/667524-preparing-color-balanced-osc-flats-in-pixinsight/

I will try and see what happens  

Hello all,

I am having this issue where I import FITS files in Pixinsight and on debayering them I get funny colors like this:

If I use the same FITS files in DeepSkyStacker I get this ... 

So I started to remove steps from the routine and when I removed the Master Flat from the "Image Calibration" step I got this (single light frame) ... 

so it looks like this part of the process screw things up and I have no idea why ... Anyone with Pixinsight experience here ? I have a hard time understandig why flats would change the color of the debayered light frame... 

Thanks!

Plate solving uses a photo of a star field (from a guide scope or main camera, it does not matter) and searches in a catalog of stars to match that star field to the same pattern of star. 

You can easily test this by uploading a photo you already have and it will solve it and give you the name of the objects and coordinates

http://nova.astrometry.net/upload

You do not need to do a 3 star alignment. Plate solving is giving you the exact coordinates your mount is pointing to, so 3 star alignment is redundant.

-> polar alignment is needed to prevent field rotation on long exposure and it helps guiding a lot

-> 3 star alignment is to tell your software where the mount is pointing. Plate solving does the same thing as long as you sync when you get the platesolver solution

-> guiding is not related to plate solving, it only keeps you mount from drifting due to bad PA or mecanical errors of your mount

In my routine :

(1) I polar align using plate solving. In my case I use Ekos and Indi (a linux set of tools and protocol a bit like ASCOM/Eqmod)

(2) I then point my target using my sky atlas softaware (Kstars) and ask it to slew to that target

(3) the plate solving tool takes a photo that is then solved using the astrometry index that I have downloaded locally on my machine (and RPI3 in this case)

(4) When the exact coordinates has been "solved" The software updates my mount coordinates to that solution

(4) The mount is then moved to get closer to the target and the process is restarted until it gets within a predefined acceptable range of my target (30'' for example)

so without any 3 star alignment I usuall get my target smack in the middle of my camera sensor after 3 or 4 iterations 

So in your case you could use a photo from a previous session and ask the software to solve this photo and slew to the exact coordinates... that is possible as well. Or you could just point to the same target in your skychart software. Both methods are valid.

Great ! Thank you for your answer

Now I just need to wait until the sky clears  

Hello all,

I want to sell my Sirius (HEQ5) mount but I've been asked if I could provide a "PE" graph. I have no idea how to do this. I know that ASCOM/EQMOD have some tools but I am not sure were to start and if there are other tools out there that could simply and efficiently create a graph that would mean something to potential buyers.

I know that some shops provide the service of tuning your mount and gives you a periodic error graphs ... I do not know what software they use to do that though.

I've hear of PEMPRO and K3CCDTools but they looked like very old tools.

Any ideas ?

11 hours ago, Astrofriend said:

Hi,

Sorry, I updated the tutorial today, but didn't add new pages, added it on the pages that was already there.

http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/tutorials/tutorial-setup-off-axis-adapter/01-tutorial-setup-off-axis-adapter.html

I don't use the off-axis adapter anymore that you see in the examples. I need a new bigger adapter.

 

Maybe I built that in the future, it could be built around this:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p6544_TS-Optics-Off-Axis-Guider-with-ZEISS-M68x1-connection---short-design.html

But all the adapters needed to it will cost some money, so I wait. Until then I have to going back to a separate guide telescope. You can see it on these pages:

http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/projects/project-three-inch-flattener/project-three-inch-flattener.html

 

Do you have plans to implement an off-axis adapter ?

 

/Lars

 

Yes this is part of my plan for a futur setup

Nice write up  but there is a broken link when trying to get to page 4 😕 

http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/tutorials/tutorial-setup-off-axis-adapter/04-tutorial-setup-off-axis-adapter.html

It took a while to get used to the new site but now I am fine with it except for one thing...

I have bookmarked the "new content" page and after going through all the new content, I click at the bottom of the page "mark site read"

What is bothering me is that any new entry of a new or an ongoing threads display the last comment on the thread instead of the original post.

So I get the title of the thread such as:

"wow this is interesting"

and the last comment would be :

"indeed"

Not very helpful !

I sometime get a dozen of threads such as "lunar picture" or "saturn" and such .. all with the same comment from the same person who decided to up their comment counts with:

"great job!"

Unless there is a way to configure this, it is quite annoying. I'd rather be able to see the original post as a preview of what the thread is about...

There, I feel better now

/end rant

On 15/10/2019 at 17:56, Phobos 226 said:

It was one of these by John Sinclair but I bought it direct from his eBay store as I don't have a printer myself. The 4 can get rather hot, especially with the warm nights we had over the summer in the UK South East this year.

did you apply the new firmware that deals with overheating ?

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/raspberry-pi-4-running-hot-new-update-will-cool-your-board-down/

Ho I see what you  mean now  thanks for the pictures

16 minutes ago, Phobos 226 said:

I just did something similar with my RPI4, USB hub and my in-progress power distribution box. I mounted a long (cheap) 35cm Skywatcher dovetail onto the top of my tube rings and made a platform bolted to it from rigid 5mm thick matte black Perspex which then has my bits mounted using strips of 3M Dual Lock so I can swap parts around if I need them or not/shift the balance etc. Of course you can bolt things to it as well, but it's cheap, lightweight and easy to work with.

If you wanted it more rigid then I would get some aluminium plate in place of the acrylic and bolt through as has been suggested, but with no cameras directly coupled to it I see no issues in a little flex for a distribution box on the top of the tube.

P.S The RPI4 4GB is a dream running KStars, I can run everything locally on Pi now and just remote in from my 4K TV at native resolution. Works flawlessly and I'm sure you'll be happy with it too!

Interesting, would you have any picture so I can better visualize what you did ?

I am running Indi/kstars/ekos on an RPI3B+ and I am quite happy with it. I want to go for the extra memory and CPU speed and, of course, the UBS3 ports of the RPI4  I plan to recycle the RPI3 to work with my 3D Printer using OctoPrint

10 minutes ago, JamesF said:

At that price I'd definitely buy the plate and drill it myself

James

spoken like a true DIYer   I just don't see how to fit a plate on those round rings that came with my OTA, I think it would be a bit wobbly

I think that changing the rings to ones with a flat surface would do the trick, I could then just bolt the bottom of the box to the ring with 4 anchor points... no need for a plate of any kind then .. It is hard to tell from the picture if the knobs are higher than the top of the ring though... If so, that would mean that I would need some kind of spacer to elevate the box ... introducing potential flexure 😕

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/tube-rings/william-optics-90mm-cnc-tube-rings.html

43 minutes ago, michael8554 said:

If you're going to mount your guidescope on top like the Primaluce then as rigid as possible - don't use the wobbly adjustable rings that they unbelievably use.

If not then nothing special because a few microns of flex won't matter.

Maybe onto the still camera mounting positions on your rings ?

Michael

No as I will be using an OAG. I would just like to mount the box which will be 3D printed. I guess I could just make holes in the box and secure it to the 2 screws on the scope rings but that would make the box a bit wobbly, I'd rather bolt the box to an aluminium plate and the plate to the rings... A custom made plate then ?

24 minutes ago, carastro said:

So earlier this year I decided to get them printed in a book, and gave both my kids a copy and various friends have bought some and so my images will live on.  I hope the book will be handed down the family generations.

What a lovely idea ! Once I get enough (good quality) material, I might actually do the same  What a nice way to be remembered.

That is why I bought the 3 volumes of Burnham's celestial handbook. For the pure pleasure of perpetuating his memory. If you don't know who he is, his life is a tragedy

So, maybe you could put this all in the form of a book and self-publish it ?

Hi all,

I've made several iteration of a power distribution box/hub attached to the side of my SW80Ed like this

It has worked fine for long time but now I would like to refine the design and add a couple of items to it.

-> make it smaller and slimmer

-> add an arduino nano board and electronics to operate a "myfocuserPro" focuser control

-> add a RPI4 inside the box (instead of a RP3B+ that hangs outside the box)

-> mount it on the top of my scope so it is easier to balance, is more rigid and has less wind drag (if there is a lot of wind, my current box act as a sail ...)

I see that prima luce Eagle boxes are mounted on top of refractors like this:

 That is the basic idea of what I want to build but what kind of plate should I use to mount the box on top of my refractor ? A custome made aluminium plate maybe ? Or do I need to change the holding brackets like they seem to have done in the example above ?

Please let me know if any of you guys or gals have an idea on how to solve this